search

DOAJ / doaj

The Directory of Open Access Journals - website and directory software
Apache License 2.0
59 stars 16 forks source link

Hotfixes to application form #972

Closed greboun closed 7 years ago

greboun commented 8 years ago

ON HOLD UNTIL REAPPLICATION SHUTDOWN

We would like to see the following changes as listed in #137 prioritized: as per our discussion on 1/5/2016 'remove' can be replaced by 'Hide from public view'

One more question could the admin /editor view of the application form be easily edited to highlight the questions that determine acceptance / rejection into DOAJ? eg text bold faced or numbering in bold

richard-jones commented 8 years ago

When doing this we need to bear in mind that some applications may have these values set, so we need a migration strategy, or a legacy data strategy.

Propose that we first check to see how many records will be affected, then make a decision what to do. If those records are rejected, for example, we might just want to delete them.

@greboun with regard to your question - yes, this would be possible - we'd provide custom descriptions to the fields that were relevant. If you want us to go ahead with that also under tnm, could you open a new issue, and list the questions you want to appear in bold. This doesn't have to wait until the reapplication shutdown, so we can do that now, independently of the above.

Assigning this to you, for review - just unassign yourself when you have decided what to do about the above.

emanuil-tolev commented 8 years ago

When doing this we need to bear in mind that some applications may have these values set, so we need a migration strategy, or a legacy data strategy.

Question 47: remove the 'No' option

There are 4,154 applications which have selected "No". A number (72) are Accepted, so we do need to think what to do here. Maybe set some kind of text in the "Other" box after removing the "No" option.

EDIT: See URL https://doaj.org/admin/applications?source=%7B%22query%22%3A%7B%22query_string%22%3A%7B%22query%22%3A%22%5C%22Not%20CC%5C%5C-like%5C%22%22%2C%22default_operator%22%3A%22AND%22%7D%7D%2C%22sort%22%3A%5B%7B%22_score%22%3A%7B%22order%22%3A%22desc%22%7D%7D%5D%2C%22from%22%3A0%2C%22size%22%3A10%7D . It shows 4,155 so not entirely accurate search, but will do for illustrative purposes here ;).

EDIT: Have answer for this. Migrate all Not-CC-Like to Publisher's own licence for both applications and journals. (This would show up in the Other box on the edit appl/journal page.)

Question 51: remove OAKlist. OAKlist has been decommissioned.

OK, shall we just remove the OAKlist answer from all 132 who have answered this? In addition, if it was their only answer, we will set their Deposit Policy answer to "None" (tech note, do this by deleting .deposit_policy completely - I checked that this is what the form does on setting the None answer).

Question 52: remove 'Other'. Question 54: remove 'Other'.

OK, again, shall we just drop the values that people have put in here over time? And set the answers to "No" (since it wasn't a Yes to begin with). These are required questions so we need to set something, otherwise the application objects become incomplete and you won't be able to save them (even if editing unrelated information, or trying to reject them).

dommitchell commented 8 years ago

Question 47

There are 4,154 applications which have selected "No". A number (72) are Accepted, so we do need to think what to do here. Maybe set some kind of text in the "Other" box after removing the "No" option. EDIT: Have answer for this. Migrate all Not-CC-Like to Publisher's own licence for both applications and journals. (This would show up in the Other box on the edit appl/journal page.)

@greboun if a journal selected 'no' then wasn't that grounds for automatic rejection?

Question 51

OK, shall we just remove the OAKlist answer from all 132 who have answered this?

Yes please but please migrate them to Sherpa/Romeo since all OAKlist records were incorporated into that.

Questions 52 and 54

OK, again, shall we just drop the values that people have put in here over time? And set the answers to "No"

Yes, this would be perfect!

emanuil-tolev commented 8 years ago

Just to note, in last meeting (13 Sept), @dommitchell said I should stop working on this for now, since there was something of great (editorial) importance he needed to discuss with @greboun before this can proceed. I can't actually recall the details now though. Anyway, I'll finish this up as soon as we know we can do it.

dommitchell commented 8 years ago

From Tom:

OK I always checked if it was a misunderstanding and often it had to be corrected as other So the approach is ok for other to be other non Creative Commons license

@emanuil-tolev apologies for the delay.

There are 4,154 applications which have selected "No". A number (72) are Accepted, so we do need to think what to do here. Maybe set some kind of text in the "Other" box after removing the "No" option.

Yes, please go ahead and do this.

greboun commented 8 years ago

@emanuil-tolev suggest you use the text " publisher specific licensing"

Dr. Tom Olijhoek Editor-in-Chief DOAJ Support us: www.doaj.org/support

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:13 PM, dommitchell notifications@github.com wrote:

@emanuil-tolev https://github.com/emanuil-tolev apologies for the delay.

There are 4,154 applications which have selected "No". A number (72) are Accepted, so we do need to think what to do here. Maybe set some kind of text in the "Other" box after removing the "No" option.

Yes, please go ahead and do this.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DOAJ/doaj/issues/972#issuecomment-248899601, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALeWRLFGNxuSMiGQGZ55touJmWvO1W31ks5qsn7sgaJpZM4G-4zR .

dommitchell commented 8 years ago

@greboun we use 'Publisher's own license' on the site already. Might be tidier to use that? http://bit.ly/2cFMv3B

greboun commented 8 years ago

@dommitchell yes Agreed!

Dr. Tom Olijhoek Editor-in-Chief DOAJ Support us: www.doaj.org/support

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 4:59 PM, dommitchell notifications@github.com wrote:

@greboun https://github.com/greboun we use 'Publisher's own license' on the site already. Might be tidier to use that? http://bit.ly/2cFMv3B

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DOAJ/doaj/issues/972#issuecomment-248929368, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALeWRM-_o8Mu4HOQFu_JR5FKqlPJj-m5ks5qspfcgaJpZM4G-4zR .

emanuil-tolev commented 8 years ago

Hotfix for this is in technical review - it's been a little more challenging than I assumed when estimating, mostly due to some technical debt having been built up over time.

The nature of tech debt is that we should be paying a bit more attention to refactoring things more during new projects, or we'll end up with tasks taking longer than expected (or just longer than they need be). As we've always done, when we're about to start new projects, we'll point out pain points that need re-developing as the DOAJ's requirements have changed over time.

emanuil-tolev commented 8 years ago

@ClaraDOAJ @greboun Could you guys test this on the test server?

For example: http://testdoaj.cottagelabs.com/admin/journal/02d821123673428b83d65c6db2612a14

Data as it was before the migration:

image

See

Check what it says now:

http://testdoaj.cottagelabs.com/admin/journal/02d821123673428b83d65c6db2612a14#done

I think it looks good, like it worked well, but let me know if anything is off with the record.

Do any other checks you can think of overall on the test system related to this issue, and if you're happy, we can roll it out live.

ClaraDOAJ commented 8 years ago

Will do!

Clara Armengou DOAJ - Community Manager

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Emanuil Tolev notifications@github.com wrote:

@ClaraDOAJ https://github.com/ClaraDOAJ @greboun https://github.com/greboun Could you guys test this on the test server?

For example: http://testdoaj.cottagelabs.com/admin/journal/ 02d821123673428b83d65c6db2612a14

Data as it was before the migration:

[image: image] https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1190172/20277857/4c01a6b6-aa9a-11e6-87c1-b5b769d27dcd.png

See

  • question 45 (heading not visible, but it's the licence question, with a 'No' answer selected)
  • question 48 (OAKlist selected)
  • question 49 (Other selected and filled)
  • question 51 (Other selected and filled)

Check what it says now:

http://testdoaj.cottagelabs.com/admin/journal/ 02d821123673428b83d65c6db2612a14#done

I think it looks good, like it worked well, but let me know if anything is off with the record.

Do any other checks you can think of overall on the test system related to this issue, and if you're happy, we can roll it out live.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DOAJ/doaj/issues/972#issuecomment-260424955, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AVjAUGBOqQ9ni8h6pJIVUr4lc0pJX1abks5q-K1PgaJpZM4G-4zR .

dommitchell commented 8 years ago

I just realised I hadn't said anything on this. I tested it and it looked fine to me. Many thanks!

Clara Armengou DOAJ - Community Manager

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:55 AM, ClaraDOAJ notifications@github.com wrote:

Will do!

Clara Armengou DOAJ - Community Manager

On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 7:49 PM, Emanuil Tolev notifications@github.com wrote:

@ClaraDOAJ https://github.com/ClaraDOAJ @greboun https://github.com/greboun Could you guys test this on the test server?

For example: http://testdoaj.cottagelabs.com/admin/journal/ 02d821123673428b83d65c6db2612a14

Data as it was before the migration:

[image: image] https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/1190172/20277857/4c01a6b6- aa9a-11e6-87c1-b5b769d27dcd.png

See

  • question 45 (heading not visible, but it's the licence question, with a 'No' answer selected)
  • question 48 (OAKlist selected)
  • question 49 (Other selected and filled)
  • question 51 (Other selected and filled)

Check what it says now:

http://testdoaj.cottagelabs.com/admin/journal/ 02d821123673428b83d65c6db2612a14#done

I think it looks good, like it worked well, but let me know if anything is off with the record.

Do any other checks you can think of overall on the test system related to this issue, and if you're happy, we can roll it out live.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DOAJ/doaj/issues/972#issuecomment-260424955, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ AVjAUGBOqQ9ni8h6pJIVUr4lc0pJX1abks5q-K1PgaJpZM4G-4zR

.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/DOAJ/doaj/issues/972#issuecomment-260583597, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFrfRHDbum9RdRPucjKX086gcpxaVlbwks5q-XOFgaJpZM4G-4zR .

emanuil-tolev commented 8 years ago

Oh cool. Will look to roll it out in the next few days then.

emanuil-tolev commented 7 years ago

@ClaraDOAJ This was rolled out today, so if you'd like to have a quick look at some journals and applications on live and review this? If it's satisfactory just close it.

richard-jones commented 7 years ago

@ClaraDOAJ - can I just prod you to review this and close it if you are happy no more needs to be done